The biggest lesson learned from this session centers around the fact that before you can become an effective leader and a successful manager of people, there is one main thing you need to know: yourself. You need to know how you communicate, how you process emotions and how you appear to others. You need to know when you might be getting angry, or happy, and how to adjust your behavior to prevent you from doing more harm than good. You need to know what your strong points are and what areas you may need work on; and you need to know that you are not going to be the expert in everything and you need to know how to be okay with that. From the first sets of reading in our ...view middle of the document...
Sadly, many people exercise the theory-in-use of looking away and not getting involved for one reason or another. My first reaction to this was that this is not a theory but simply defines character, or what you do when no one is looking. If you know what is right and what the appropriate way is to respond or act, and you choose not to for some reason, some may say that you are a bit lacking in character. But as Argyris and Schon concluded, the people displaying a difference in the two theories (what they say they would do vs. what they actually do) do so without even realizing it (Anderson, 1997).
Argyris and Schon are no strangers to the parallels of behavior and communication. These two theories fit well into one other well-known theory, Model I and Model II. One category (Model I) focuses more on the hard-edged goal of being right and protecting oneself, and little flexibility in communication (“Model I and Model II.” nd). This lends itself towards the theory-in-use that might indicate that we react to our instinctual desire to be right and win, while the espoused theory points more towards Model II. Open communication, growth, and a goal centered on providing the most beneficial results for everyone involved with much testing and interaction (“Model I and Model II.” nd) are some of the focal points that indicate an environment of how we should react and handle situations. Additionally, theories-in-use and espoused theories are present in Argyris’s Immaturity-Maturity Theory, where a person more advanced on the mature scale will have very little difference if their espoused and in-action theories were compared, where a person in a more immature stage may have a bigger gap in the actions of the two theories (Hersey, et al. 2008).
Anderson explains further in his online excerpt that the question is raised “if people are unaware of the theories that drive their action Theories-in-use), then how can they effectively manage their behavior? (1997, para. 9)” Building on this question, we were asked to explore our own espoused theories and theories-in-use as they pertain to our professional intrapersonal, interpersonal and leadership communications. Further, we will explore how better to implement our espoused theories within our current work environment and apply them to leadership communication and conflict resolution. The structure of my comparison will be identifying the espoused theories of the three categories first, followed by the theories-in-action, and finally the plan to implement the espoused more fully.
The espoused theories for my professional intrapersonal, interpersonal and leadership communication, or how I should handle and process these communications, are all very similar and fall in line. I truly feel that regardless of what the audience of my professional communication is, the message structure, style and desired results are all in line with one another. The end result is to organize the thoughts,...